The Times wants your views: DNA ethnicity results

[california dreamin]

Hi everyone,

I see Trystan has kick started us all on this topic    Funnily enough I thought to reply when the topic first came out but was not sure what I could contribute.

I am quite interested in DNA testing thought I don't really understand it all, but do understand 'pockets' of it.  I have been to one or two talks, but when I try and read about it I am usually blinded by science.  My father has tested for our family as he being the eldest male member was the best candidate for the job. You really want the oldest male to take the test  for less mutation in the genes.  Dad is also one of Niall's sausages, but we rather knew that already.  Why I did want Dad to test is because as he is in his 90's he won't be with us much longer and I am convinced, like most things, the science surround this will improve with time.  His results will be on file to be resurrected at a later date.

Our family being Irish means that we must employ as many methods as possible to trace our family and get a better idea  of our origins.  Don't get me wrong I think working with traditional methods is also important.  But the DNA alongside the traditional research methods can only strengthen ones research.

We tested with FTDNA, one of the reasons is that at the time they had many more families testing that other companies with our surname - it's also an American company and the American's really love all this stuff. Yes, cost wise I did rather wince, but I thought it was worth it given that my Dad may not be around many more years.  I recently attended a family history conference and met a American lady that was attending the conference based entirely on the DNA findings of her father.  She also had invested in a dozen testing kits to give to strangers in the locality of where her family had originated from in order to advance her research.  I was taken aback for two reasons 1. the cost of a dozen kits! and 2. The guts it takes to ask strangers for their DNA (!)  So it goes to show the difference we in the UK view costs and DNA as opposed to our cousins in the US.

And finally, I would just say I know Ancestry are pushing their DNA, but I just wouldn't consider using them. Don't know I just feel they are playing at it and really liked the manner in which FTDNA and other companies like the National Geographic project presented and run their projects.  Ancestry just seems to 'dumb' down everything and I wonder if they are actually analysing their results with the same care?

[jaywit]

Thinking on what some people have said about the accuracy of the results I wonder if identical twins have ever been tested by different companies?

 Surely they should come up with identical results? Would be interesting if they didn't

[MercianSte]

 Doing an Ancestry DNA test is probably the best thing I have done in the last year.
 
 My Gran was brought up in an orphanage and she never really knew her parents. Finding information on her father was quite easy, but her mother proved a problem. Her name was Florence May Bannister, I had her wedding certificate which showed her father as Henry but I had no other information, including where she was from or her exact age (although I did know she celebrated her birthday on the 5th April). I narrowed my search down to one birth record, that of Florence Bannister born on the 31st March 1887 but I was not 100% certain I was looking at the same person as both the birth date was wrong and the lack of a middle name. The very first hit I had on Ancestry through the DNA was from a great nephew of the Florence Bannister born on the 31st March 1887, I now know for certain that I was looking at the correct ancestor! (And for the record my Gran was right with the birthday, Florence did celebrate her birthday on the 5th April as shown on the 1939 Register!).
 
 I also have found other more distant relatives who at least prove that my research is correct!
 
 As for my genetic makeup, I don't really think it is that accurate. Apparently I am 29% British, 24% Scandinavian, 23% Irish, 19% Western European, 3% Eastern European, 2% Iberian and have trace elements from Italy/Greece. Yet on all of my branches (the youngest will be no later than 1800) I have nothing but Anglo-Welsh ancestors! I will admit that I have a few illegitimate ancestors but noting that will stretch my results like that! I know us English are a mongrel race, perhaps that is what is being shown in my makeup.

[Jones the Search]

Not really interested.
 DNA is great for forensics to catch Rapists, and Murderers .
 I have used to it ascertain what breeds my rescue dog has evolved from. This was useful in pointing out certain health traits in specific breeds.
 I can see no advantage to knowing who I really came from. I am quite content with the research I have done and the accompanying paper trail of certificates and church records, along with census details to satisfy my curiosity.
Thank you for asking for my input.

[Roger The Hat]

Mrs Hat is often accusing me of dragging my knuckles, so I'm fairly sure of where I come from............
 
It's not for me.
Apart from the cost, I'm not bothered about ethnicity - I prefer to take my research back one step at a time through reasonably proven links. Unless the ancestor I'm researching also had their DNA tested I can't see that it would be of huge use to me.
Just my opinion, and respect to all others.

'Hat.

[jamison]

People are busy here - many new posts even before l can start typing !!!
Well what can l say....
I'm neither for nor against DNA testing for genealogical purposes but would only use it if it were difficult to locate earlier generations.
Linking up with others genetically would help break down the brick wall one comes up against from time to time.
At this stage - all roads lead to the UK and l am happy with that - maybe later when l have exhausted all online possibilities.
As my grandmother always said - you are who you are in mind and soul - but the body tells the truth that might hurt you - later l understood what she meant !!!
My certifcates - bdm - give information that was correct at the time it was recorded.
As you can see l'm not bothered one way or the other - at the moment the paper trail makes it more fun or real to discover the past.
Jamison

[bugbear]

For those wondering what DNA can, can't and might do for them, this example may be of interest;

"Richard III's DNA throws up infidelity surprise"
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-30281333

    BugBear

[Regorian]

Having a Welsh surname I don't need to be told about my ethnicity. Having tracked down and met quite a few relatives from wider family, many have Welsh skulls. Mind you, none of them live in Wales or want to know anything about it.

Beyond that, there is someone on here, and we keep in contact, whose ancestor could well have been brother to my greatgreatgrandfather. Neither of us have the readies at this time to have a DNA test done.



 

[Beeonthebay]

Having a Welsh surname I don't need to be told about my ethnicity. Having tracked down and met quite a few relatives from wider family, many have Welsh skulls. Mind you, none of them live in Wales or want to know anything about it.

Beyond that, there is someone on here, and we keep in contact, whose ancestor could well have been brother to my greatgreatgrandfather. Neither of us have the readies at this time to have a DNA test done.

What's a Welsh skull? 

*looks in mirror